Case 3314039/2021 · Employment Tribunal
Claimant v Mr A Goodrich and Openmart Ltd — 2023
- Case reference
- 3314039/2021
- Decision date
- 5 May 2023
- Jurisdiction
- England & Wales
- Judge
- Employment Judge Postle
Parties
2 namedClaimant
Claimant
Respondent
Key findings
Tribunal's reasoningAt the preliminary hearing on 5 July 2022, Employment Judge R S Drake recorded that there had been no attendance by the claimant. The judge was satisfied that the notice of hearing had been sent to the address nominated by the claimant, and noted a prior order of 9 March 2022 requiring the claimant to particularise the alleged less favourable treatment on grounds of age and race, including the dates, the person alleged to have perpetrated it, and the comparator relied on.
An unless order dated 9 June 2022 provided that the race and age discrimination claims would stand dismissed if the claimant did not comply by 23 June 2022. The judge considered the claimant's email of 23 June 2022 and found that it did not provide the required particulars and did no more than restate the ET1. The judgment states that the race and age discrimination claims therefore stood as dismissed automatically.
The judge also directed on 5 July 2022 that the claimant provide further and better information about her constructive dismissal claim and her claims for allegedly unpaid holiday pay and wages by 26 July 2022, again on an unless basis. The claimant did not reply in compliance with that order, or with the earlier orders, and did not respond to the direction to show cause why the claims should not be struck out for non-compliance and lack of active pursuit. The formal judgment therefore states that all claims, as against both respondents, are struck out.
Claims and outcomes
5 findings recorded| Claim type | Issue or finding | Outcome | Protected characteristic | Award |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Race discrimination | The claimant had been ordered on 9 March 2022 to particularise the alleged less favourable treatment on grounds of race, including dates, perpetrators and comparators. An unless order dated 9 June 2022 provided that the race discrimination claim would stand dismissed if she did not comply by 23 June 2022; the judge found that her email of 23 June 2022 did not comply. | Dismissed | Race | — |
| Age discrimination | The claimant had been ordered on 9 March 2022 to particularise the alleged less favourable treatment on grounds of age, including dates, perpetrators and comparators. An unless order dated 9 June 2022 provided that the age discrimination claim would stand dismissed if she did not comply by 23 June 2022; the judge found that her email of 23 June 2022 did not comply. | Dismissed | Age | — |
| Constructive dismissal | On 5 July 2022 the judge directed the claimant to provide further and better information by 26 July 2022 and made that an unless order. No reply was received and the balance of the claims was struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
| Unlawful deduction from wages | On 5 July 2022 the judge directed the claimant to provide further and better information about allegedly unpaid wages by 26 July 2022 and made that an unless order. No reply was received and the balance of the claims was struck out. | Struck out | — | — |
| Holiday pay | On 5 July 2022 the judge directed the claimant to provide further and better information about allegedly unpaid holiday pay by 26 July 2022 and made that an unless order. No reply was received and the balance of the claims was struck out. |
Official outcome judgment PDF
Gov.uk primary recordThe official judgment PDF on gov.uk contains the tribunal's outcome, reasoning, and any remedy details. Where this page does not yet show extracted outcomes for every claim, use the PDF as the authoritative source.
Published on gov.uk under the Open Government Licence v3.0.
How we got this data
Case essentials (reference, date, judge, venue, country, claim categories) are extracted from the structured metadata gov.uk publishes alongside each decision. Parties and monetary figures are extracted from the judgment PDF text. Key findings and per-claim outcomes require a second extraction pass that is not yet complete for this case — until then, the primary source linked above is the authoritative record. See full methodology.
Named in this case and want it removed? Submit a takedown request. The page will be withdrawn on receipt and the editor will follow up within five working days.